Assessing Environmental Fragility in a Mining Area for Specific Spatial Planning Purposes

2019, 27(2)27(3): 169–182 MORAVIAN GEOGRAPHICAL REPORTS

MORAVIAN MORAVIAN GEOGRAPHICAL REPORTS GEOGRAPHICAL REPORTS

Fig. 3. Members of the International Advisory Board of the Fig. 4. The Löw-Beer Villa in Brno, a place of the award MGR journal in front of the Institute of Geonics ceremony Institute of Geonics, The Czech Academy of Sciences journal homepage: http://www.geonika.cz/mgr.html

Fig. 5. Professor Eva Zažímalová, president of the Czech Fig. 6. Professor Bryn Greer-Wootten has his speech during Academy of Sciences, presents Professor Bryn Greer-Wootten the award ceremony doi: 10.2478/mgr-2019-0013 with the honorary medal

Illustrations related to the paper by R. Blaheta et al. (photo: T. Krejčí, E. Nováková (2×), Z. Říha)

Assessing environmental fragility in a mining area for specific spatial planning purposes

Radu-Matei COCHECI a, Ioan IANOª b *, Cătălin Niculae SÂRBU a, Anthony SORENSEN c, Irina SAGHIN d, George SECĂREANU e

Abstract Environmental fragility in a mining area is evaluated both in terms of its biophysical (natural) and socio- economic components and their anthropogenic interactions. We identified multiple criteria and indicators for this task, but then reduced these according to responses given by 60 experts in domains related to spatial planning. We used the selected criteria and indicators to develop environment fragility indices for each territorial administrative unit (LAU2) in Gorj County in south-western Romania. The resulting indices reveal quite large spatial variations in fragility and evidence that highly fragile human and physical environments are to some extent intertwined. In this respect, such environmental components as climate, soils, ecosystems, natural hazards and economic issues provide constraints on human activities, whilst humans themselves can, without sufficient care, increase fragility and adversely affect the quality of living environments for present and future generations. We also explore how such estimates of natural and anthropogenic fragility might enable better specific planning for local and regional development that aims to ameliorate both environmental and human adversity in an integrated way. Keywords: fragility index, mining area, specific spatial planning, Gorj County, Romania

Article history: Received 3 January 2019, Accepted 25 June 2019, Published 30 September 2019

1. Introduction such basic concepts as territorial vulnerability and resilience The numerous interactions between human society (Graziano and Rizzi, 2016). Moreover, there is an emergent and its bio-physical environment tend to become more preoccupation with defining environmental fragility in complicated over time (Harden et al., 2014). This is different territorial systems. For example, a recent study partially due to such factors as increasing population, an by Macedo et al. (2018) defines fragility as an “interaction accelerating myriad of technological advances, and the between vulnerability and anthropogenic influences” shifting dynamics of various economic activities. (p. 1268) and develops an environmental fragility index Mining activities in particular tend to affect adversely, applied specifically to the neotropical savannah biome. both directly and indirectly, many human settlements and In this study we attempt to define a complex fragility require careful territorial planning. Indeed, some mining index which incorporates the major component fragilities activities are so harmful that the “environmental risks of territorial systems. This index is subsequently applied incline to migrate out of the area” (Vojvodíková, 2005, p. 51). to a Romanian region that is environmentally damaged by In such territorial systems, it is very important to assess mining activities, and discusses how better planning systems their environmental fragility before defining any specific can help remediate conditions. features of territorial planning. We focus, in particular, on Romania’s Gorj County, where Increasingly, environmental studies demonstrate a clear the socialist Ceauºescu regime greatly increased energy focus on territorial risks, often involving trade-offs between production based on lignite to expand industrial production.

a ”Ion Mincu” University of Architecture and Urban Planning, Bucharest, Romania b Interdisciplinary Center of Advanced Research on Territorial Dynamics, University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania (*corresponding author: I. Ianos, e-mail: [email protected]) c University of New England, Armidale, Australia d “Ovidius” University of Constanta, Constanta, Romania e Faculty of Geography, University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania

169 MORAVIAN GEOGRAPHICAL REPORTS 2019, 27(3):2019, 169–182 27(2)

The post-socialist dynamics of all East-European countries taking into account the new resources needed by existing have witnessed strong de-industrialisation processes communities. This task is often made both complex and involving the closure of many large enterprises, including difficult because of clashes between differing perspectives mining areas activities, the majority of which can be and strategies across many different spatial scales: global, categorised as brownfield sites (Kunc et al., 2014). Romanian national, regional and local (Drummond et al., 2015). For investors find such regions unattractive, especially on local and sub-regional authorities to take the best planning account of their environmental problems. decisions in the case of fragile environments, including those Taking into account the multiple consequences of de- damaged by mining activities, it is also very important to industrialisation processes (Ianoº, 2016) and the lack of clear acknowledge the interactions between biotic and abiotic responsibilities for land rehabilitation, the affected human components, between the terrestrial and aquatic ones settlements need careful spatial planning (Cocheci, 2016) to (Omernik and Griffith, 2014), and between the internal and enhance their revival prospects. Thus our approach focuses external environments of territorial systems. on evaluating the form and origin of local environmental Political systems, which have until recently focused mainly fragility and how it might be managed. This task also on macro-level strategies, should also, according to Lange engaged people working on spatial planning and research Salvia et al. (2019) look at the regional and local levels. And activities for local and regional administrations, all of whom this task is likely to involve developing strategies to enable have important environmental and planning knowledge on local and economically specialised communities to adapt which we have drawn. to new conditions. The issue of likely irreversible climate change, however, is likely to complicate the management of 2. Theoretical background fragile environments, requiring new strategies to allocate financial, social, economic, cultural and other resources to Recent decades have witnessed many studies on both effectively improve both environmental quality and place local and global environmental harms generated by such prosperity in mining areas (Carvalho, 2017). processes as climate change, rapid urbanisation, economic Some of the most adversely affected local communities globalisation, and enhanced transport or communication in terms of environmental quality may well be those technologies. The resulting environmental degradation where national strategies for energy development require decreases long-term sustainability and contributes to acceptance of drastic changes in land use. Communities deepening spatial disparities in overall environmental quality depending on surface and underground mining or oil (Salvati and Zitti, 2007). Consequently, land remediation exploitation may have witnessed a temporary rise in strategies adopted by human communities to restore valued economic well-being (Cocheci et al., 2015), but also ecosystems (Song et al., 2018) may need to vary from place to often with strongly negative impacts on environmental place, a task that may become difficult where human activity quality (Zobrist et al., 2009; Wasylycia-Leis et al., 2014). has exceeded the environment’s resilience capacity. Landscape reconstruction and ecological renewal require Fragility, which may be regarded as the inverse of stability, the transformation of degraded environments into high is an inherent characteristic of any ecosystem, regardless of quality ones by improving ecological amenities, while the amount of disturbance to which it is exposed (Nilsson simultaneously seeking to ensure sustainable development and Grelsson, 1995). Thus, the biophysical environment acts in local communities (Zhang et al., 2011). as a potential constraint on human activities and vice versa, The old 'man/nature' unity paradigm has been reinforced in introducing an element of environmental determinism into the last fifteen years, although many years ago such analysts our arguments (Robinson, 2004). In ecology, for example, as Commoner (1971), and Bonnefous (1970) realised its the concept of limitative factors (Odum et al., 1971) states complexity. This approach involves the morality and ethics that the presence and success of organisms depends on of the space and place (Ianoº et al., 2010) and represents several different conditions and any condition which an important component in looking for a new paradigm surpasses a tolerance limit will be considered a limitative concerning human-nature relations. Humans continuously factor. As a result, certain environmental conditions seek to reduce fragility imposed by the natural environment, may be considered limitative factors for the development by moderating its various limiting factors. Such approaches of either anthropogenic or natural ecological systems, however frequently impact negatively on environmental thereby constraining human activities (Mac, 2003). Thus quality (Iojă, 2008). To make matters more complex, geologic, geomorphologic, climatic, hydrological, pedological some human activities may negatively affect others. For or biological elements (Douglas, 2013), are all potential example, areas with mining industries may impose negative limiting factors in describing a site’s suitability for different externalities on landscapes and adjacent residential districts human activities (Pătroescu et al., 2012). In this context the (Pătroescu et al., 2012) and adversely affect their quality estimation of fragility could be a key element for adopting of life. Health problems, for instance, are often caused by specific procedures for planning social-ecological systems poor air quality (Gyourko et al., 1997; Douste-Blazy and (Petrosillo et al., 2006). Richert, 2000; Dumitrache, 2004). Hence, areas affected Consequently, a decrease in environmental quality due by anthropogenic environmental degradation may also be to the overexploitation of mining resources, may affect considered fragile environments, as they are characterised the communities’ capacity to survive in such conditions. by significantly lower quality of life. Furthermore, activities It therefore becomes necessary to define a specific such as open-pit mining or heavy industry may limit environmental concept, namely the fragile environment, agriculture potentials or the possible development of other which may suffer seriously adverse impact by small changes economic activities such as recreation and tourism locally to key environmental or human variables. The management or in adjacent areas (Spasić et al., 2007). Abandoned mining of this type of environment entails political, economic and areas are particularly problematic since the realisation social processes (Wyant et al., 1995; Oikonomou et al., 2011), of new development is often associated with the high cost of which target ecological conservation and renewal while site remediation (Stanilov, 2007).

170 2019, 27(2)27(3): 169–182 MORAVIAN GEOGRAPHICAL REPORTS

Attracting investors willing to fund site decontamination of the environmental fragility concept. Thus, our aim and reconversion can be difficult (Constantinescu, 2012), is to define the concept of a fragile environment and unless remediation is sensibly required of mining companies propose an environmental fragility index as an integrated for development consent in the first place. measurement tool for the environment, to be used in Best practices in environmental management, acquired designing specific planning instruments to tackle these experientially over many centuries and subsequently issues, with a special focus on ecological renewal measures incorporated in effective and legally enforced regulatory as the basis of targeted environmental policies. practices, have been the main instruments used to reduce In their scientific approaches, some scholars focus on the environmental degradation. Such practices have targeted success factors for brownfields re-development (Frantál both natural environments and communities affected by the et al., 2015) and, indirectly, on the areas affected by de- negative externality effects of various anthropogenic actions industrialisation. In this context, we have only carried out (Douglas, 2013). The latter case includes such spatial planning interviews with specialists involved in spatial planning, in provisions as building restrictions to protect naturally fragile order to consider their vision on the most important factors floodplains (Douglas, 2013), valued ecologies, or sanitary that define the environmental fragility for this specific well-being (Ianoº et al., 2017). Thus, conservation interests mining area. can lead to the declaration of certain terrestrial or marine areas as natural protected zones characterised by specific 3. Study area land use development restrictions (Figueroa and Sanchez- Cordero, 2008). Such human-nature interactions often lead Gorj County is located in Romania’s South West region to spontaneous re-naturalisation or the targeted ecological (see Fig. 1), and is the most important region for Romania’s renewal of degraded areas, processes that can be kick-started energy industry due to its high capacity hydroelectric power by defined strategies aimed at rebalancing the relationships plants and coal-fuelled power plants (Cocheci, 2016). Coal- between the two domains. based electricity production decreased nationally from 40% in 2008 to 27% in 2014, however, due to the increasing Generally, four major approaches can be identified in proportion of renewable energy. Wind power contributed ecosystem restoration (Primack et al., 2008): no human only 0.1% in 2008, but rose to 9.0% nationally by 2014, actions; rehabilitation of some ecosystem structures and while hydro-energy rose 3% in the same period (Romania’s functions; partial spatial restoration; or complete (i.e. holistic) Statistical Yearbook, 2016). restoration. The last of these dimensions, which seeks the integral reconstruction of an ecosystem’s structure and With a surface area of 5,602 square km, or 2.5% of functions – or in other terms its natural capital – frequently Romania’s national territory, Gorj County has a resident neglects important social and economic dimensions (Aronson population of 336,995 inhabitants or 1.68% of Romania’s et al., 2006; Clewell and Aronson, 2013). On the other total (National Institute for Statistics data, 2013). This hand, re-naturalisation, which evolves spontaneously and county, which represents a NUTS3 (Nomenclature of naturally without any human intervention, may lead to the Territorial Units for Statistics) unit at the European level, emergence and development of a different but sustainable comprises 70 communes, although 45% of its population is ecosystem to the one destroyed. This aspect is essential for located in the county’s nine cities. Four of them – Motru, urban and territorial planners who, having a holistic and Rovinari, Ţicleni and Bumbeşti Jiu – are mono-industrial integrated professional background, understand both the in the sense that a major part of their economies and systemic relationships between city, region, urbanity and employees are concentrated in a single industrial sector environment (Glikson, 1971) and the processes by which or even one industrial company (Dumitrescu, 2008). Their ecosystems themselves evolve. key industries are, respectively, coal production, electrical In situations where the physical environment was so energy, oil production, and industrial machinery. drastically changed that native species cannot regenerate, Gorj contains over 70% of Romania’s stock of inferior as in the case of open-pit mining, ecological restoration can lignite coal (Braghină et al., 2008) which feeds the high occur only if preceded by redistribution of the overburden capacity power plants at Rogojelu and Turceni. Located removed, the addition of soil, water and nutrients, and the in the Rovinari area, this lignite basin is characterised by elimination of invasive species (Primack et al., 2008). As open-pit extraction with significant environmental impact such, re-naturalisation, part of a cyclical phenomenon specific (Cuculici et al., 2011). Over 62% of Motru’s morphology was to territorial dynamics, included in the larger framework of transformed by coal exploitation (Titu and Balaszi, 2007). territorial succession, often seems an easier and less expensive The restructuring of the mining areas, in which all solution. Alternatively, the most effective environmental underground and some surface exploitations were closed renewal strategy in some districts in terms of cost and after 1996, had a great impact on villages whose economies acceptability of outcome might involve a mixed combination depended heavily on open-pit mining (Braghină et al., 2011). of ecological restoration and re-naturalisation. The Romanian strategy for the mining industry for 2017– Both ecological restoration and re-naturalisation can be 2035 (Ministerul Economiei, 2017) is an example of the regarded as approaches aimed at the ecological renewal attempt to overcome the economic and social disruption of mining areas where the ecosystems have been affected caused by the cessation of mining activity. by natural or anthropogenic disturbances. Hence, both In 1999, the national government designated three 'deprived renewal models can be regarded as possible measures to areas' in Gorj County, all related to mining activities. They be included in spatial planning and environmental policy were Schela (anthracite), Albeni (oil and natural gas) and documents, to mitigate environmental degradation in such Motru-Rovinari, already mentioned as Romania’s main lignite fragile areas. We considered that Romania’s Gorj County, coal basin. They were given special financial and fiscal support the NUTS3 county experiencing “Romania’s greatest designed to stimulate investment, including 10 years without anthropic interference” (Braghină et al, 2008, p. 9), would taxes for local business profits, and land for new investment. be a suitable study area to test the possible application The strategy’s impact was not in all cases as effective

171 MORAVIAN GEOGRAPHICAL REPORTS 2019, 27(3):2019, 169–182 27(2)

Fig. 1: Location of the case study area at the national level (Romania). Source: authors’ elaboration as expected and, consequentially, the mining industry’s (Douglas, 2013). Starting from the territorial system contraction in such areas has affected the county’s economy concept, we defined two analytical sub-systems, natural with considerable adversity (Popescu, 2000). As a result, the and anthropogenic, the first offering finite sets of resources main dependence of the county on mining may represent a high to the second, which in turn has a considerable capacity risk from an economic and social point of view, especially over to transform and capitalise on them (Ianoº, 2000b). the medium to longer term (Braghină et al., 2010). Besides Consequently, the territorial system conceptualisation aids the negative environmental impact of mining, particularly us in analysing the fragility of the environment, taking the open-pit lignite quarries (Spasić et al., 2007), the county into account both biophysical and socio-economic factors in is also confronted with other environmental issues. Some particular places. The uncontrolled exploitation of natural mountain and plateau areas are vulnerable to natural flooding resources and the lack of a clear land use policy may also (Minoniu, 2011), whose effects are aggravated by such human create disequilibrium between the support capacity of the activities as deforestation and quarrying. Frequent torrential natural subsystem and the consumption of resources by rains are the main cause of these hazards (Marinică and local and regional communities. Such an imbalance may lead Marinică, 2013). Romania’s entire South-West region has to modified ecosystems having a negative impact on human experienced intense land cover changes in the last 25 years well-being, and enhanced fragility, which may at some point (Petriºor et al., 2010), which, combined with heavy rainfall, morph into a phase of creative destruction (Holling, 1973). also increase its vulnerability to geomorphologic hazards, and Our approach tries to develop a new dimension of especially landslides (Glade, 2003). environmental fragility, taking into consideration the high The County Territorial Plan developed in 2009–2011, complexity of the internal and external environments which is the latest territorial planning document approved of a territorial system, and including both natural and for Gorj County, included both a development strategy and anthropogenic components. This is a complementary several environmental measures: air, water and soil pollution approach by comparison with other uses of the fragile/ regulations; mitigation of floods and landslides; protection fragility concept, developed by different authors, which of natural areas; and even the ecological reconstruction reflect more or less the connection with a diversity of of mining areas (UAUIM, 2011). Unfortunately, there is territorial policies (Petrosillo et al., 2006; Baliamoune-Lutz no monitoring of these measures. Many current planning and McGillivray, 2008; Ferreira, 2017; Yu et al., 2018). instruments in Romania lack the necessary mechanisms Each territorial system is not isolated, having structural for implementation, especially concerning the financing and functional relationships with surrounding territorial of the proposed measures (Ianăºi, 2008). They are also systems. Both internal changes and external perturbations poorly integrated with specific national environmental may disturb fundamental relationships between natural and policies. The county environmental agencies check the anthropogenic sub-systems in a particular territorial system. implementation process, but the penalties for the offenders Unbalanced changes inside a territorial system, because of are too low to ensure a high level of compliance, thereby overexploitation and limited eco-services, can modify the imperilling both governments and their strategies. initial state and transform the internal environment in a fragile one. Because any territorial system is connected 4. Methodology with other surrounding territorial systems, its own fragility can induce asymmetric flows of mass, energy and information 4.1 The fragile environment concept between it and adjacent areas. Throughout history, society has had to learn to Consequently, complex interactions between the internal adapt to evolving environmental constraints caused by and external environments may increase environmental either anthropogenic actions or extreme natural events fragility, both natural and anthropogenic, at larger

172 2019, 27(2)27(3): 169–182 MORAVIAN GEOGRAPHICAL REPORTS spatial scales. Such events can be very important for local than latent statistics. For example, place accessibility can and regional development (Ianoº et al., 2013), because be measured in terms of current modes of transport – their effective management of fragile environments requires the cost, convenience, service frequency, likelihood of hazards, implementation of specific territorial planning measures and so on. In the future, the quality of internet connectivity at different spatial scales simultaneously, as shown in could be far more important in adapting to a transformative Figure 2. Such a management process is alas a difficult task high-tech world or, alternatively, new forms of physical given issues such as regional diversity, system complexity, transport might emerge. Likewise, local cultures that are persistent and often unsympathetic human-environmental risk accepting, entrepreneurial, and future-oriented might interactions, inevitable information deficiencies, and the be far more important for local development prospects than presence of many lagged effects. more conventional measures of economic and social well- Given these complexities, a major question concerns the being. This theoretical approach is not the target of the capacity of the fragile environment concept to be useful for current paper, however, postponing it for the future. both spatial planning and environmental policy. Effective 4.2 Methodological approaches management of complex problems can only result from improved understanding of that complexity and, as far as Taking into consideration (indirectly) the selected case possible, its measurement. Insofar as it helps differentiate study, we established a methodology to identify and quantify both the ecological and societal problems of particular different types of fragile environments on the basis of areas and suggests policy avenues for their amelioration agreed indicators and techniques for measuring the most or enhancement of sustainability, we consider the concept relevant environmental components. Such analysis raises worth investigation. We can further identify two types of the possibility of tailor-made spatial planning measures fragility: current and latent. Given that many physical at different scales, especially local and regional, as shown in environments have an inherent capacity to revert resiliently Figure 3. Based on our definition of the fragile environment to previous configurations, current and latent fragility concept, we realised a set of environmental fragility types overlap to some extent. The analysis of anthropogenic issues, and associated criteria. In parallel, a set of criteria and however, is heavily weighted to current statistics rather indicators were proposed, with their relevance being tested

Fig. 2: The fragile environment concept. Source: authors’ conceptualisation

Fig. 3: Methodological steps in defining specific territorial planning processes in a fragile environment Source: authors’ conceptualisation

173 MORAVIAN GEOGRAPHICAL REPORTS 2019, 27(3):2019, 169–182 27(2) in terms of the 60 responses we received from the survey 4.3 Criteria and indicators of specialists in territorial planning. The specialists were The methodology used for selecting criteria and indicators selected from our network of professionals involved in at the local level is similar to the one previously used to spatial planning activities, regardless of their profession. determine environmental restrictiveness at a regional scale The aim of the questionnaire was for the experts to grade (Cocheci, 2016). In order to quantify environmental fragility in each criterion from 1–10, without knowing the study area on areas suffering from different types of environmental issues, which the analysis would be made. As a result of this expert assessment, we concluded that the number of indicators is as described above, we first proceeded to define a typology of less important compared with their perceived relevance to fragile environments, based on our literature review regarding the quantification of environmental fragility. Consequently, the influence of different factors on environmental fragility we associated one criterion to each type of environmental (see Tab. 1). We identified nine types of fragile environments, fragility, with each criterion being measured through the focusing on different aspects of the environment: six describing most relevant indicator (also according to available data at natural fragility (from geological, geomorphological, climatic, local level). Consequently, we realised a list of indicators that hydrological, pedological and biological points of view); and represented the basis for our spatial analysis. three describing anthropogenic fragility (from land use, socio- economic and legislative points of view). The next step was the qualitative analysis of these indicators, thus obtaining a synthetic index of environmental For each type of fragile environment identified, between fragility, spatially constructed at county level. Based on one and five criteria describing different aspects of fragility the principle of territorial contiguity, the areas considered were selected, with a total of 27 criteria being considered, to be fragile environments were thus identified. The as shown in Table 1. A questionnaire was designed and critical analysis of these areas revealed distinct territorial distributed to 75 experts in various domains related to spatial particularities. These, in turn, should be taken into account planning, with the aim to rate these criteria on a scale from 1 in shaping specific territorial planning measures designed to 10 based on their importance. In the end, 60 specialists to ensure improved sustainable development at the level of answered our survey. The structure of the questionnaire these newly-defined territorial aggregates. enabled them to comment on some items, which was useful

No. Fragility Type Criteria for definition (source)

1. Geological fragility High seismicity (Lang et al., 2012) Sedimentary rocks which hamper foundation (Klein et al., 2013) Small depth of groundwater (under 2 metres) (Klein et al., 2013) 2. Geomorphologic fragility High altitudes (over 1200 m) (Bathrellos et al., 2012) High relief fragmentation (Haddaway et al., 2013) Presence of landslides (Papathoma-Köhle et al., 2007) Presence of ravines 3. Hydrological fragility High incidence of floods and flash floods (EEA, 2010) Low quality of surface water caused by pollution (Ongley and Booty, 1999) Low quality of groundwater caused by pollution (Stamatis et al., 2011) 4. Climatic fragility Incidence of Drought (Tánago et al., 2016) Negative extreme temperatures (EEA, 2010) Positive extreme temperatures (EEA, 2010) Low air quality caused by pollution (Douste-Blazy and Richert, 2000) 5. Soil fragility Soil contamination caused by pollution (McClintock, 2012) Land degradation due to soil erosion (Cerdan et al., 2010) Low soil fertility (Sanchez, 2002) 6. Biological fragility Presence of protected species and habitats 7. Fragility related to land use Major land use changes (deforestation, urbanisation, etc.) (Popovici et al., 2013) High degradation of land by human interventions (quarries, tailings dumps etc.) (Spasić et al., 2007) 8. Socio-economic fragility Low turnover per inhabitant (Pavel and Moldovan, 2016) Low level of education (Ramos et al., 2012) Low accessibility (Caschili et al., 2015) High level of land abandonment (Shengfa and Xiubin, 2017) Declining population (Martinez-Fernandez et al., 2012) 9. Fragility of the environmental legislation High proportion of natural protected areas (Geldmann et al., 2015) High surface occupied by sanitary protection areas

Tab. 1: Types of fragility (partial fragilities) and related criteria Source: authors´ compilation

174 2019, 27(2)27(3): 169–182 MORAVIAN GEOGRAPHICAL REPORTS in suggesting better methodological approaches. The average individualised two main disruptions inside of the values’ ranking for each criterion was defined by dividing the sum of distribution. Having evaluated the fragility index for each total answers by the number of specialists. So, the value for LAU2 level (commune), we first divided the scores into three criterion i (Vci) was: classes – high, medium and low – and then mapped their locations. In a second stage of the analysis, we designated as Vci = (∑ Vij) / 60, highly fragile any locations within Gorj County where three contiguous LAU2 units (Ianoº, 2000a; Cocheci, 2017) could where V = the rating given by each specialist j (1 ≥ j ≤ 60) ij be identified. Such regions were subsequently compared to criterion i (1 ≥ i ≤ 26). those parts of the County previously identified as ‘deprived In summary, for each of the nine dimensions of a fragile areas’ in 1999. environment previously defined, we selected the criteria Based on the analysis at the county level, we depicted the with the highest expert ratings, reducing the number possibilities for implementing ecological renewal as a planning of them from 27 to 8. The resulting criteria were then approach in fragile environments, taking into consideration expressed by 8 indicators (one for each criterion) defined several of the current legislative frameworks in Romania. according to data found in official sources, research studies By using such a synthetic index, territorial planning might or the latest planning documentations, at LAU2 level (Local become a real support for disadvantaged rural areas, for Administrative Unit 2 – municipalities or equivalent units, their better adaptation to environmental challenges, such after the European Union classification of administrative as land degradation, climate change, population ageing and units in effect until 2017). Eventually, all indicators were economic changes (Mocanu et al., 2018). normalised (with 100 being the maximum value for each category), using the formula: 5. Results Vs = Vr / VM × 100, Using a questionnaire survey, we received responses from different experts related to spatial planning: human where: Vs = standardised value; Vr is the current value; geography (18), urban planning (16), environmental sciences and VM is the maximum value of the values’ chain. (16), sociology (6), architecture (2) and engineering (2). Most For each LAU2 level unit, the fragility index (Fi) was of the experts (48) worked at a university and/or its research defined as the sum of standardised values of all indicators. centres, while the other 12 worked in private companies. The process of summing the standardised indices makes Furthermore, about half of the experts questioned (34) had the implicit assumption that all variables of fragility are at least 10 years experience in the field. Table 2 illustrates weighted the same. At the same time, some of variables the selected criteria that received the highest average score have a positive impact on fragility (as against increasing (taking into account all expert ratings), along with the it), and others a negative one (increasing the fragility). This indicators that we used for quantifying each criterion at procedure accounts for the summation that is obtained, LAU2 level and the data sources that we consulted. We used taking into account the issue of “+” positive variables and data from the latest existing studies at county level (regarding “−” negative variables. Computing the fragility index for environmental quality assessment and spatial planning each LAU2 unit, and analysing the entire value’s chain, we documents: see Tab. 2). The analysis for each fragility

Fragility type Criterion Score Indicator Source

Geological High seismicity 7.86 Highest value of terrain acceleration for Master Plan of Gorj earthquakes with average return period of 100 County (2011) years: acceleration index decreased from southeastern (0.16) to north western (0.08) communes. Geomorphological Presence of landslides 8.76 Number of landslide areas (over 200 square County Plan of Risk metres) in LAU2 unit. The highest values are Analysis and Coverage registered in Bustuchin and Rosia de Amaradia (2009), amended by field (seven landslides). investigation Hydrological High incidence of floods 8.79 Presence/absence (on rivers, flash-floods or both). Master Plan of Gorj and flash floods County (2011) Climatic Low air quality caused by 7.52 Presence/absence of sources of air quality County report regarding pollution* degradation. environmental quality (2013) Pedological Soil contamination 7.24 Number of contaminated sites in LAU2 unit: 155 Regional Action Plan caused by pollution contaminated sites are located in Gorj County, for the Environment concentrated in just 24 LAU2 units. 2014-2020 Land use High degradation of land 7.69 Surface of degraded land (ha). Only Godineºti National Institute of by human interventions commune has no degraded land, in comparison Statistics data (2013) – coal quarries, tailings with Câlnic and Mătăsari with over 1900 ha of dumps etc. degraded land each. Socio-economic Low accessibility 7.86 Accessibility index (one point for each identified Master Plan of Gorj transport infrastructure problem). County (2011) Environmental Natural protected areas 7.79 Percent of Natura 2000 SCI site area from total Ministry of Environment legislation LAU2 units’ areas. dataset, GIS analysis

Tab. 2: Selected criteria and indicators used for quantification Source: authors’ compilation

175 MORAVIAN GEOGRAPHICAL REPORTS 2019, 27(3):2019, 169–182 27(2) type (partial fragility) showed an overlapping between the population is less than or equal to the 33rd percentile the most-quoted biological fragility criterion (presence of value) included 23 LAU2 units (fragility index value of at protected species and habitats) and the legislative fragility least 340), based on which we defined four different fragile one (natural protected areas). In this case, we decided to areas, each containing at least three contiguous LAU2 units take only one of them into account when calculating the (see Fig. 4 and Tab. 3). Taking into account the average size fragility index, and we have selected ‘the natural protected of each LAU2 unit (commune), we consider that for this areas’ as characterising the Legislative fragility type. The county an area is significant enough if it has a total surface main argument was that natural protected areas enclose the of more than 150 square kilometres. majority of protected species and habitats, conforming to An analysis of the spatial distribution of the fragility several Romanian laws and norms. This means that we kept index within Gorj County shows high values in the only eight criteria (eliminating the biological fragility) and northern part (due to natural features – mountainous eight of the most relevant fragility indicators. area with low accessibility and a high density of protected A Fragility Index was computed for each LAU2 unit species), as well as the high values within 7 of the 9 cities by summing the standardised values, recognising (and in the county – especially industrial or mining cities such assuming) that each of the 8 variables was weighted by the as Rovinari, Bumbeºti-Jiu, Þicleni or Târgu Cărbuneºti. respondents at roughly the same level. Theoretically, the The fragile areas that we identified are closely related to fragility index value is contained in the general interval important mining areas in the county, as further discussed from 0 (no fragile features) and 800 (summed maximum in the next section. value registered for each of the eight selected criteria). The four fragile areas contain 18 LAU2 units The fragility index, calculated using the normalised (approximately 25% of the county’s administrative values of the above-mentioned indicators, registered values territorial units), four urban and 14 rural. In three of these between 116.60 (commune of Săuleºti) and 507.02 (town of fragile areas, the fragility source is an anthropogenic one Tismana). The upper tertile of the data series (i.e. 33% of and is related to mining: open-pit coal-mining (Rovinari

Fragile area LAU 2 units Main fragile elements Source of fragility

Rovinari Urban: Rovinari Air pollution (all), soil contamination Coal mining (Bâlteni), land degradation (Mătăsari, Rural: Bâlteni, Câlnic, Fărcăºeºti, Câlnic) Mătăsari, Negomir, Urdari Þicleni Urban: Þicleni, Târgu Cărbuneºti. Air pollution (all), soil contamination Oil and natural gas extraction Rural: Licurici (Þicleni, Târgu Cărbuneºti), Low accessibility (Þicleni) Amaradia Valley Rural: Căpreni, Cruºet, Hurezani, Air pollution and seismicity (all), low Oil and natural gas extraction Stejari, Turburea. accessibility (Stejari), soil contamination (Turbure) Parâng Urban: Novaci Air pollution (Novaci, Crasna – wood Natural features (mountainous area) Rural: Crasna, Baia de Fier industry), Protected areas (all), low accessibility (Baia de Fier)

Tab. 3: Fragile areas in Gorj County. Source: authors’ categorization

Fig. 4: Fragility index at LAU2 level and delimitation of fragile environmental areas Source: authors’ categorisation

176 2019, 27(2)27(3): 169–182 MORAVIAN GEOGRAPHICAL REPORTS fragile area) and oil and natural gas extraction (Târgu established in these areas did not have the expected impact, Cărbuneºti and Amaradia Valley areas). This confirms the however, and did not lead to the economic development of significant environmental impact of the county’s energy the deprived areas (Săgeată, 2012). industry, as stated in the description of the study area. This The comparison between the fragile areas identified and is mostly caused by the high capacity power plants’ main the deprived areas in Gorj County shown in Figure 5 thus source of energy, which is the lignite coal in the Motru- illustrates the connections between environmental fragility Rovinari basin. and social and economic issues. A more detailed analysis of the existing fragile elements Hence, seven out of the 13 LAU2 units in the Rovinari in the four fragile areas that we identified highlights the deprived area have also been included in the Rovinari fragile problem posed by the mining industry to air quality and area, while the city of Târgu Cărbuneºti was included in soil contamination (Rovinari, Þicleni and Amaradia Valley both the Albeni deprived area and in the Þicleni fragile fragile areas), with the coal industry (Rovinari area) also area. This highlights the need for a better integration of responsible for significant land degradation due to open-pit sectoral policies at regional, county and local level, in order mining. The situation is different in the Parâng fragile area, to tackle both environmental and social vulnerabilities. where fragility is mostly related to the presence of natural Taking into account that the territorial fragility is more protected areas (with many protected species), and the low connected with the anthropogenic influences generated by accessibility caused by the natural features of the territory mining activities, for Gorj County, these areas constitute a (mountainous area). priority in spatial planning. Mine site abandonment is one of the situations in which 6. Discussion the lack of control and minimal mitigation actions for Starting from the fact that Gorj County has a special environmental degradation result in great economic, social territorial structure, with a diversity of fragility types, and environmental impacts. The fragility index confirmed and with a strong restructured mining activity which has our initial hypothesis regarding environmental issues in asked for government decisions favourable for further the mining areas of Gorj County, while the comparison with development, we have considered that this is a good sample the deprived areas declared by law highlighted the link location in which to apply our methodology. between environmental fragility and limited development possibilities. Considering the environmental degradation 6.1 Comparative analysis between fragile areas in such areas, we need to consider what spatial planning and deprived areas instruments, linked with environmental policy measures, A Romanian law enacted by the National Parliament and could be used to ensure a sustainable development of in 1999, defined deprived areas as being characterised by these areas in the future. at least one of the following conditions: (1) the existence of mono-industrial productive structures accounting for 50% 6.2 Implications for specific territorial planning or more of the region’s total employees; (2) over 25% of the Apart from any recuperation alternatives, some employees in the area affected by collective layoffs due to development strategies may also have to focus on ensuring the restructuring of economic units; (3) an unemployment a high-rate exploitation of the natural resources. We rate 30% or more higher than the national average; or should also admit that effective management of these (4) isolated areas with poorly developed infrastructure themes is a ‘whole-of-society’ issue involving all tiers of (Cocheci, 2015). The financial incentives offered to firms government, private business, media, various kinds of

Fig. 5: Comparison between fragile areas and deprived areas in Gorj County Source: authors’ elaboration

177 MORAVIAN GEOGRAPHICAL REPORTS 2019, 27(3):2019, 169–182 27(2) social institutions, individual activists, and so on (Yaskal et In this context, the use of an environmental fragility index al., 2018). It requires strong leadership across all of these can aid in the identification of LAU2 units with significant dimensions and strong networking to, in effect, mould environmental issues, thus underlining their common people’s culture in the direction of caring passionately problems. Given the lack of clear and specific public policy for environmental quality and also seeking high quality in this arena, the creation of voluntary Intercommunity local development. All this has to be underpinned by clear Development Associations (or Local Action Groups) could and strongly enforced regulation and education about the be a good opportunity for communes and small cities to skills necessary to deliver preferred outcomes. So, effective act together in finding solutions and external financing planning and management are a multi-faceted and complex opportunities for these common problems. The national task (Sorensen, 2017). government could help trigger such local actions financially, In the case of Gorj County, the implementation of but national or regional private organisations could play effective management frameworks requires coordinated a role. Modern regional anti-fragility requires a myriad of actions among all relevant actors. These comprise local innovative approaches (Taleb, 2012). If some scientists have populations and associated community groups, business demonstrated, about one hundred years ago, a similarity corporations, government authorities mainly at local and of interactions between the four planetary surfaces and county level, and various national agencies dealing with regional/local places (Ianoº et al., 2018), then why cannot we such key arenas as environment, economic development, try to identify and to extrapolate the mechanisms of regional education and transport. or local environmental fragility, in further approaches, to the global level? In practice, the main focus is likely to be on the cleaning of affected sites and on planning their re-use. In mining Taking into account the problems generated by the areas, the rehabilitation process should prioritise the permanent and huge interventions of the coal industry on reduction of environmental degradation by reducing natural and socio-economic components, the definition of landslide risks and by re-integrating the degraded land specific planning processes for this area is fully justified. into the ecological circuit. This would be a significant Such planning could facilitate the understanding and raise contribution towards the improvement of local and the awareness of the population and the territorial actors regional environmental quality. A key element, however, to simulate the effects of any important changes before is the long time – often decades – required for stabilising they are made, and to establish short- and medium-term tailing dumps, as well as the very high costs associated priorities. with these actions (Spasić et al., 2007). In a recent study, Bański et al. (2018) define for Poland, 7. Conclusions areas of strategic intervention, respectively growth areas A vision of development based on an eco-systemic and problem areas. For delineation of problem areas, at a approach (Vădineanu, 1998) considers territories regional level, they used 21 indicators equally covering transformed by people as a specific organisation level of natural, social and economic issues. The main finding the life on Earth, related to a vision exclusively focused regarding problem areas is that their identification is on natural ecological system. Similar to individual living consistently useful for a better application of strategic entities, human society is also limited in its development planning. Our study, using another methodology, shows the due to the constraints of fragile factors, which can often put importance for the fragile areas of defining special planning the integrity of socio-ecological systems under doubt (as the procedures to prioritise a sequence of actions to enable pressure of inappropriate economic activities dramatically balanced territorial development. decreases the quality of environmental services). The Moreover, the legislative framework in Romania complexity of operations required in the ecological renewal has covered these problems only partially, and not in approach to a human-changed territory requires a careful an integrated manner. Most of the existing legislation analysis of the social and economic subsystems in that area, regarding degraded environments does not have associated in order to find a new desirable equilibrium between the financial mechanisms, and thus relies only on state natural and socio-economic systems. In this approach, a funding. Ideological factors also make such actions difficult simple dereliction of the resource extraction sites generates to implement, since the closure of economic activities strong restrictions on the development of the human contributing significantly to environmental degradation communities. often conflicts with the local population’s need for jobs. Consequently, the forced industrialised areas in the 1970s The mining activities located in Gorj County are operated and 1980s in Romania require a controlled re-naturalisation only by a State Company: Oltenia Lignite Company, of the derelict lands, followed their de-industrialisation by which has the responsibility to make rehabilitation of the adequate central government financial, administrative areas degraded by coal exploitation. As only the costs for and scientific resources. Hence, the decisions regarding the affected areas are covered, all additional phenomena ecological renewal approaches need to become an important generated directly and indirectly by coal exploitation part of territorial development and environmental policies. are left to be solved by local and regional authorities. In While the case study area involved a Romanian county, the our view, the region’s extractive industries work to the environmental issues related to mining areas in a post- benefit of Romania as a whole and, therefore, the nation industrial and a post-socialist context can be extended to as a whole has a financial responsibility for environmental other examples in Eastern Europe as well (Stanilov, 2007). restitution, whether re-establishment of original ecologies In the cases of closed mining exploitation, especially the or re-naturalisation, or some mixture of the two. National case of open-pit mining, the alterations of the physical responsibility may go further and embrace anthropogenic environment long with the re-distribution of land use in renewal, including re-educating workers with new skills, as such areas affected by re-naturalisation processes, can have well as infrastructure improvements (e.g. health, transport, important impacts on the settlement network, as well as on and so on). the quality of life and life-styles of the local population.

178 2019, 27(2)27(3): 169–182 MORAVIAN GEOGRAPHICAL REPORTS

The proposed index of environmental fragility, referring to BRAGHINĂ, C., DRĂGHICI, C., PEPTENATU, D., PINTILII, different environmental fragility aspects of the environment R. (2008): Rural changes in restructuring mining areas (geology, geomorphology, hydrology, climate, soil, society and within Gorj County. The Annals of Valahia University of its impact), can be used as a tool designed to integrate the Târgovişte, Geographical Series, 8: 151–158. analysis of the structural and functional elements of both the BRAGHINA, C., TALÂNGA, C., ZAMFIR, D., CEPOIU, natural and the anthropogenic sub-systems. These elements A. L. (2010): Entrepreneurial initiative and regional are included within the proposed aggregated index, which development. Case study of Gorj County (Romania). could offer a real tool for local and regional authorities and, Human Geographies-Journal of Studies and Research in especially, for those facing the mitigation of closure effects of the mining activities. The strong point of this index is the Human Geographies, 4(1): 79–88. fact that it offers a comparative view on the affected territory BRAGHINĂ, C., PEPTENATU, D., DRAGHICI, C., and aids in the differentiation of the local communities in PINTILII, R. D., SCHVAB, A. (2011): Territorial their efforts to have a new environmental quality. management within the systems affected by mining. The measurement of the environmental fragility index at Case study the South-Western Development Region in local and regional level shows that some areas in the county, Romania. Iranian Journal of Environmental Health especially rural areas, face significant environmental and Science & Engineering, 8(4): 343–352. socio-economic problems, with most of them also being part CARVALHO, F. P. (2017), Mining industry and sustainable of the deprived areas declared by law in 1999. In this regard, development: time for change. Food and Energy Security, a first step would be for communes facing similar issues to 6(2): 61–77. become partners through the creation of Intercommunity CASCHILI, S., DE MONTIS, A., TROGU, D. (2015): Associations, which would aid them in financing larger Accessibility and rurality indicators for regional projects together. development. Computers, Environment and Urban At the LAU2 scale of analysis, this index can be used in Systems, 49: 98–114. the elaboration of local and intercommunity strategies and CERDAN, O., GOVERS, G., LE BISSONNAIS, Y., VAN policies. Nevertheless, the currently-used indicators to quantify the different fragility criteria could be improved, OOST, K., POESEN, J., SABY, N., GOBIN, A., depending on the re-organisation of the collection data VACCA, A., QUINTON, J., AUERSWALD, K., system at local level, as most of the studies realised at county KLIK, A., KWAAD, F. J. P. M., RACLOT, D., IONITA, I., level have started to be outdated. Adding new data series, REJMAN, J., ROUSSEVA, S., MUXART, T., ROXO, M. J., especially those characterising natural phenomena such as DOSTAL, T. (2010): Rates and spatial variations of soil imminent landslides, potential flood areas or even quality erosion in Europe: a study based on erosion plot data. of air indices at LAU2 level, as well as enlarging the access Geomorphology, 122(1–2): 167–177. of researchers and local administrators, could greatly aid CLEWELL, A. F., ARONSON, J. (2013): Ecological in making environmental reconstruction more rigorous, Restoration. Principles, Values and Structure of an appropriate and efficient. Emerging Profession. Washington/Covelo/London, Island Press. Acknowledgement COCHECI, R. M. (2015): Individualisation of deprived areas The authors gratefully acknowledge to the anonymous in Romania’s South West region, Journal of Urban and reviewers for their constructive comments and suggestions Regional Analysis, 7(2): 161–176. that have improved the quality of the manuscript. COCHECI, R. M. (2016): Analysis of Fragile Environments in the South-West Oltenia Development Region. Urbanism. References: Architecture. Constructions, 7(2): 21–240. ARONSON, J., CLEWELL, A. F., BLIGNAUT, J. N., COCHECI, R. M. (2017): Models of territorial planning MILTON, S. J. (2006): Ecological restoration: A new in the restrictive environment. University Publishing frontier for nature conservation and economics. Journal House Bucharest. of Nature Conservation, 14(3): 135–139. COCHECI, R. M., DOROBANTU, R. H., SARBU, C. N. BALIAMOUNE-LUTZ, M., MCGILLIVRAY, M. (2008): State (2015): Environmental Degradation in Rural Areas fragility: Concept and measurement. Research Paper with High Anthropic Pressure – Impact and Planning No. 2008/44. Helsinki, UNU-WIDER. Models. Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental BAŃSKI, J., DEGÓRSKI, M., KOMORNICKI., T., Sciences, 10(3): 25–36. ŚLESZYŃSK, P. (2018): The delimitation of areas of COMMONER, B. (1971): The closing circle: nature, man, strategic intervention in Poland: A methodological and technology, Knopf, New York. trial and its results. Moravian Geographical Reports, CONSTANTINESCU, I. P. (2012): Shrinking Cities in 26(2): 84–94. Romania: Former Mining Cities in Valea Jiului. Built BATHRELLOS, G. D., GAKI-PAPANASTASSIOU, K., Environment, 38(2): 214–228. SKILODIMOU, H. D., PAPANASTOSSIOU, D., CUCULICI, R., MITRICĂ, B., GRIGORESCU, I., CHOUSIANIDIS K. G. (2012): Potential suitability for MURĂTOREANU, G. (2011): A Diachronic Approach of urban planning and industry development using natural the Build-Up Areas in the Motru-Rovinari Coal Field. The hazard maps and geological–geomorphological parameters. Annals of Valahia University of Târgovişte, Geographical Environmental Earth Sciences, 66(2): 537–548. Series, 11: 163–174. BONNEFOUS, E. (1970): L’homme ou la nature? Paris, DOUGLAS, I. (2013): Cities – an environmental history. Hachette. London, I.B. Tauris.

179 MORAVIAN GEOGRAPHICAL REPORTS 2019, 27(3):2019, 169–182 27(2)

DOUSTE-BLAZY, P., RICHERT, P. (2000): La ville � bout de IANĂŞI, L. (2008): Priorities for a legislative agenda in souffle – Pollution urbaine et santé publique. Paris, Plon. urban planning. In: Sârbu, C., Pascariu, G. [eds.]: Recent DRUMMOND, M. A., STIER, M. P., AUCH, R. F., TAYLOR, preoccupations in spatial planning. Bucharest, “Ion J. I., GRIFFITH, G. E., RIEGLE, J. L., HESTER D. J., Mincu” University Publishing House. SOULARD, C. E., MCBETH, J. L. (2015): Assessing IANOª, I. (2000a): Less favoured areas and regional Landscape Change and Processes of Recurrence, development in Romania, In: Horvath, G. [ed.]: Regions Replacement, and Recovery in the Southeastern Coastal and Cities in the Global World, Essays in Honour of Plains, USA. Environmental Management, 56: 1252–1271. Gyorgy Enyedi (pp. 176–191). Pecs, Centre for Regional DUMITRACHE, L. (2004): Health state of Romanian Studies, HAS. Population – a geographical approach. Bucharest, IANOª, I. (2000b): Territorial systems – A geographical University Publishing House (in Romanian). approach (in Romanian). Bucharest, Technical DUMITRESCU, B. (2008): Mono-industrial towns in Publishing House. Romania: between forced industrialisation and economic IANOª, I. (2016): Causal relationships between economic decline. Bucharest, University Publishing House. dynamics and migration. Romania as case study. EUROPEAN ENVIRONMENTAL AGENCY (EEA) (2010): In: Dominguez-Mujica, J. [ed.]: Global Change and Mapping the impacts of natural hazards and technological Human Mobility, Series title: Advances Geographical accidents in Europe. Technical Report, Luxembourg, and Environmental Sciences (pp. 249–264). Dordrecht, Publications Office of the European Union, Vol. 13. Springer. FERREIRA, I. A. (2017): Measuring state fragility: a review IANOŞ, I., HUMEAU, J. B., TĂLÂNGĂ, C., BRAGHINĂ, C., of the theoretical groundings of existing approaches. ANCUŢA, C., BOGDAN, L. (2010): Ethics of space and the Third World Quarterly, 38(6): 1291–1309. treatment of most disadvantaged areas. Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences, 5(2): 203–210. FIGUEROA, F., SÁNCHEZ-CORDERO, V. (2008): Effectiveness of natural protected areas to prevent land IANOª, I., PETRIªOR A. I., ZAMFIR, D., CEPOIU A. L., use and land cover change in Mexico. Biodiversity and STOICA I. V., TĂLÂNGĂ, C. (2013): In search of Conservation, 17(13): 32–23. a relevant index measuring territorial disparities in a transition country. Romania as case study. Die Erde, FRANTÁL, B., KUNC, J., KLUSÁČEK, P., MARTINÁT, S. 144(1): 69–81. (2015): Assessing Success Factors of Brownfields Regeneration: International and Inter-Stakeholder IANOª, I., MERCIU, C., SORENSEN, A. (2017). Incoherence Perspective. Transylvanian Review of Administrative of urban planning policy in Bucharest: its potential for Sciences, 11(44): 91–107. land use conflict. Land Use Policy, 60(1): 101–112. GELDMANN, J., COAD, L., BARNES, M., CRAIGIE, I. D., IANOª, I., SĂGEATĂ, R., SORENSEN, A. (2018). Simion HOCKINGS, M., KNIGHTS, K., LEVERINGTON, F., Mehedinþi’s Contribution to Modern Romanian CUADROS, I. C., ZAMORA, C., WOODLEY, S., Geography. Professional Geographer, 70(3): 504–512. BURGESS, N. D. (2015): Changes in protected area IOJĂ, I. C. (2008): Assessment methods and techniques management effectiveness over time: A global analysis. of environmental quality in the Metropolitan area Biological Conservation, 191: 692–699. of Bucharest (in Romanian). Bucharest, University GLADE, T. (2003): Landslide occurrence as a response to Publishing House. land use change: a review of evidence from New Zealand. KLEIN, J., JARVA, J., FRANK-KAMENETSKY, D., Catena, 5(3): 297–314. BOGATYREV, I. (2013). Integrated geological risk GLIKSON, A. (1971): The ecological basis of planning. mapping: a qualitative methodology applied in St. Hague, Martinus Nijhoff. Petersburg, Russia. Environmental earth sciences, 70(4): 1629–1645. GRAZIANO, P., RIZZI, P. (2016): Vulnerability and resilience in the local systems: The case of Italian provinces. KUNC, J., MARTINÁT, S., TONEV, P., FRANTÁL, B. Science of the Total Environment, 553: 211–222. (2014): Destiny of Urban Brownfields: Spatial Patterns and Perceived Consequences of Post-Socialistic GYOURKO, J., KAHN, M., TRACY, J. (1997): Quality of Life Deindustrialization. Transylvanian Review of and Environmental Comparisons, Handbook of regional Administrative Sciences, 41E: 109–128. and urban economics, Vol. 3: 413–1454. LANG, D., MOLINA-PALACIOS, S., LINDHOLM, C., HADDAWAY, N. R., STYLES, D., PULLIN, A. S. (2013): BALAN, S. (2012). Deterministic earthquake damage Environmental impacts of farm land abandonment in and loss assessment for the city of Bucharest, Romania. high altitude/mountain regions: a systematic map of the evidence. Environmental Evidence, 2(1): 18. Journal of Seismology, 16(1): 67–88. HARDEN, C. P., CHIN, A., ENGLISH, M. R., FU, R., SALVIA, A. L., LEAL FILHO, W., BRANDLI, L. L., GALVIN, K. A., GERLAK, A. K., MCDOWELL, P. F., GRIEBELER, J. S. (2019). Assessing research trends MCNAMARA, D. E, PETERSON, J. M., LEROY POFF, N., related to Sustainable Development Goals: Local and ROSA E. A., SOLECKI, W. D., WOHL, E. E. (2014): global issues. Journal of cleaner production, 208: 841–849. Understanding Human-Landscape Interactions in the MAC, I. (2003): Science of the Environment (in Romanian). “Anthropocene”. Environmental Management, 53(1): 4–13. Cluj-Napoca, Europontica. HOLLING, C. S. (1973): Resilience and stability of ecological MACEDO, D. R., HUGHES, R. M., KAUFMANN, P. R., systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, CALISTO, M. (2018): Development and validation of 4(1): 1–23. an environmental fragility index (EFI) for neotropical

180 2019, 27(2)27(3): 169–182 MORAVIAN GEOGRAPHICAL REPORTS

savannah biome. Science of the Total Environment, PETROSILLO, I., ZURLINI, G., GRATO, E., 635: 1267–1279. ZACCARELLI, N. (2006): Indicating fragility of socio- MARINICĂ, I., MARINICĂ, A. F. (2013): Pluvial Hazards in ecological tourism-based systems. Ecological Indicators, Oltenia in May 2012. Riscuri si Catastrofe, 13(2): 21–34. 6(1): 104–113. Master Plan of Gorj County (2011): Master Plan of Gorj POPESCU, R. C. (2000): Romanian Industry during the County. Târgu Jiu: County Council. XX Century. A Geographical Analysis (in Romanian). Bucharest, Oscar Print. MCCLINTOCK, N. (2012): Assessing soil lead contamination at multiple scales in Oakland, California: Implications POPOVICI, E. A., BALTEANU, D., KUCSICSA, G. (2013): for urban agriculture and environmental justice. Applied Assessment of changes in land-use and land-cover Geography, 35(1–2): 460–473. pattern in Romania using Corine Land Cover database. Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental MINISTERUL ECONOMIEI (2017): Mining Strategy of Sciences, 8(4): 195–208. Romania 2017–2035 (in Romanian) [online]. Available at: http://economie.gov.ro/images/resurse-minerale/ PRIMACK, R., PĂTROESCU, M., ROZYLOWICZ, L., STRATEGIE.pdf IOJĂ, C. (2008): The fundaments of biological diversity conservation (in Romanian). Bucharest, AGIR. MINONIU, A. S. (2011): Provisions for floods prevention and control in Gilort Hydrographic basin. Riscuri si RAMOS, R., SURINACH, J., ARTÍS, M. (2012): Regional Catastrofe, 9(2): 237–246. economic growth and human capital: The role of over- education. Regional Studies, 46(10): 1389–1400. MOCANU, I., GRIGORESCU, I., MITRICĂ, B., POPOVICI, E. A., DUMITRASCU, M. (2018): Regional disparities ROBINSON, J. (2004): Squaring the circle? Some thoughts related to socio-economic determinants of agriculture on the idea of sustainable development. Ecological in the Romanian Plain. Journal of Urban and Regional Eonomics, 48(4): 369–384. Analysis, 10(1): 79–99. SALVATI, L., ZITTI, M. (2007): Territorial disparities, natural NILSSON, C., GRELSSON, G. (1995): The fragility of resource distribution, and land degradation: a case study ecosystems: a review. Journal of Applied Ecology, in southern Europe. GeoJournal, 70(2): 185–194. 32(4): 677–692. SANCHEZ, P. A. (2002): Soil fertility and hunger in Africa. ODUM, E. P., ODUM, H. T., ANDREWS, J. (1971): Science, 295(5562): 2019. Fundamentals of ecology. Philadelphia, Saunders. SĂGEATĂ, R. (2012): Inter-communal cooperation and OIKONOMOU, V., DIMITRAKOPOULOS, P. G., regional development: The case of Romania. Quaestions TROUMBIS, A. Y. (2011): Incorporating Ecosystem Geographicae, 31(2): 95–106. Function Concept in Environmental Planning SHENGFA, L., XIUBIN, L. (2017): Global understanding of and Decision Making by Means of Multi-Criteria farmland abandonment: A review and prospects. Journal Evaluation: The Case-Study of Kalloni, Lesbos, Greece. of Geographical Sciences, 27(10): 1169–1184. Environmental Management, 47(1): 77–92. SONG, Y., HOU, D., ZHANG, J., O’CONNOR, D., LI, G., OMERNIK, J. M., GRIFFITH, G. E. (2014): Ecoregions of the GU, Q., LI, S., LI, P. (2018): Environmental and socio- Conterminous United States: Evolution of a Hierarchical economic sustainability appraisal of contaminated land Spatial Framework. Environmental Management, remediation strategies: A case study at a mega-site in 54(6): 1249–1266. China. Science of the Total Environment, 610: 391–401. ONGLEY, E. D., BOOTY, W. G. (1999): Pollution remediation SORENSEN, A. (2017): Community Development in an planning in developing countries: Conventional Age of Mounting Uncertainty: Armidale, Australia, In: modelling versus knowledge-based prediction. Water Halseth, G. [ed.]: Transformation of Resource Towns and International, 24(1): 1, 31–38. Peripheries: Political economy perspective (pp. 249–267). Oxford and New York, Routledge. PAPATHOMA-KÖHLE, M., NEUHÄUSER, B., RATZINGER, K., WENZEL, H., DOMINEY-HOWES, D. SPASIĆ, N., PETOVAR, K., JOKIĆ, V. (2007): Transformation (2007): Elements at risk as a framework for assessing of Settlements and Population in Large Lignite Basins. the vulnerability of communities to landslides. Natural Belgrade, Institute of Architecture and Urban and Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 7: 765–779. Spatial Planning of Serbia. PAVEL, A., MOLDOVAN, B. A. (2016): The effect of Access STAMATIS, G., PARPODIS, K., FILINTAS, A., ZAGANA, E. to Grants and Transport Infrastructure on Local (2011): Groundwater quality, nitrate pollution and Economic Development in North-West Region’s Rural irrigation environmental management in the Neogene Areas. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, sediments of an agricultural region in central Thessaly 39(2): 140–152. (Greece). Environmental Earth Sciences, 64(4): 1081–1105. PĂTROESCU, M., IOJĂ, C., ROZYLOWICZ, L., VÂNĂU, G., STANILOV, K. [ed.] (2007): The Post-Socialist City: Urban NIŢĂ, M., PĂTROESCU-KLÖTZ, I., IOJĂ, A. (2012): Form and Space Transformations in Central and Eastern Integrated assessment of environmental quality in the Europe after Socialism. Dordrecht, Springer. residential spaces (in Romanian). Bucharest, University TALEB, N. (2012): Antifragile: Things that gain from Printing House. disorder. London, Penguin. PETRIŞOR, A. I., IANOŞ, I., TĂLÂNGĂ, C. (2010). Land TÁNAGO, I. G., URQUIJO, J., BLAUHUT, V., VILLAROYA, F., cover and use changes focused on the urbanization DE STEFANO, L. (2016): Learning from experience: processes in Romania. Environmental Engineering and a systematic review of assessments of vulnerability to Management Journal, 9(6): 765–771. drought. Natural Hazards, 80(2): 951–973.

181 MORAVIAN GEOGRAPHICAL REPORTS 2019, 27(3):2019, 169–182 27(2)

TITU, A., BALAZSI, K. (2007): Implications of coal mining YU, Q., YUE, D., WANG, Y., KAI, S., FANG, M., MA, H., exploitation in morphology change. Case study: the ZHANG, Q., HUANG, Y. (2018): Optimization of Motru and Baraolt Mining Basins. Lucrările Seminarului ecological node layout and stability analysis of ecological Geografic "Dimitrie Cantemir", 27: 161–170. network in desert oasis: a typical case study of ecological VĂDINEANU, A. (1998): Sustainable Development. Theory fragile zone located at Deng Kou County (Inner and Practice. Bucharest, University Publishing House. Mongolia). Ecological Indicators, 84: 304–318. VOJVODÍKOVÁ, B. (2005): Colliery Brownfields and the ZHANG, J., FU, M., HASSANI, F. P., ZENG, H., GENG, Y., Master Plan of Ostrava. Moravian Geographical Reports, BAI, Z. (2011): Land Use-Based Landscape Planning 13(2): 49–56. and Restoration in Mine Closure Areas. Environmental Management, 47(5): 739–750. WASYLYCIA-LEIS, J., FITZPATRICK, P., FONSECA, A. (2014): Mining communities from a Resilience Perspective: ZOBRIST, J., SIMA, M., DOGARU, D., SENILA, M., YANG, H., Managing Disturbance and Vulnerability in Itabira, POPESCU, C., ROMAN, C., BELA, A., FREI, L., Brazil. Environmental Management, 53(3): 481–495. DOLD, B., BĂLTEANU, D. (2009): Environmental and socio-economic assessment of impacts by mining WYANT, J. G., MEGANCK, R. A., HAM, S. H. (1995): A activities – a case study in the Certej River catchment, planning and Decision-Making Framework for Ecological Western Carpathians, Romania. Environmental Science Restoration. Environmental Management, 19(6): 789–796. and Pollution Research, 16(1): 14–26. YASKAL, I., MAHA, L. V., PETRASHCHAK, O. (2018): Spatial Distribution of Economic Activities and Internal Economic Integration in Romania. Journal of Urban and Regional Analysis, 10(2): 217–240.

Please cite this article as: COCHECI, R. M., IANOª, I., SÂRBU, C. N., SORENSEN, A., SAGHIN, I., SECĂREANU, G. (2019): Assessing environmental fragility in a mining area for specific spatial planning purposes. Moravian Geographical Reports, 27(3): 169–182. Doi: 10.2478/mgr-2019-0013.

182